Month: September 2018

Incumbent Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill came out in opposition to confirming Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court 10 days ago. This move may have been ill advised as polls show she now trails her GOP opponent, Josh Hawley.

Previous polls in the last month have been tied. Hawley’s slight surge after the senator announced her opposition to Kavanaugh may be an omen of things to come.

A new poll released by The Missouri Scout on Saturday shows that Republican challenger Josh Hawley has taken a two point lead over Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) in the Missouri Senate race just days after she announced she will be voting against the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

Hawley leads McCaskill by a margin of 48 percent to 46 percent in the poll conducted by Missouri Scout over two days, from Wednesday, September 26 to Thursday, September 27.

McCaskill announced her opposition to Kavanaugh on September 19. The second day of the poll was conducted on the same day Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who has accused him of attempting to sexually assault her 36 years ago at a time and place she cannot recall and with no corroborating witnesses or evidence, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Significantly, the poll found that 49 percent of likely voters said the Supreme Court confirmation process for Brett Kavanaugh has made them less likely to vote for McCaskill, while only 42 percent said it made them more likely to vote for her.

The overall seven point deficit for McCaskill on this important question helps explain why Hawley has jumped into a two point lead. Even though the results are barely within the 2.5 percent margin of error, they are different than three national polls conducted earlier in September, all of which showed the race tied.

At least in Missouri, Democratic tactics against Kavanaugh may be backfiring:

Among female respondents, 47 percent said the confirmation process made them less likely to vote for McCaskill, while 42 percent said it made them more likely.

Among male respondents, 50 percent said the confirmation process made them less likely to vote for McCaskill, while 41 percent said it made them more likely.

Among Non-Partisan respondents, 46 percent said the confirmation process made them less likely to vote for McCaskill, while 39 percent said it made them more likely.

I think you’ll find this to be true in most Republican states. The process has been so tainted that voters could be in the mood to punish Democrats for their actions. How much of a difference it might make nationwide remains to be seen.

The bottom line is that McCaskill is going to need a significant number of GOP conservatives to get re-elected. Missouri has more Republicans in it than Democrats and McCaskill’s opposition only makes it that much harder for her to overcome the GOP advantage in the state.

The significance of this race cannot be overstated. If the Republicans can flip just one or two Democratic senate seats, the chances of the Democrats taking control of the upper body are reduced to close to zero. Hawley is very well funded and has run a decent campaign so far, making it difficult for McCaskill to attack him as an “extremist” which has been the Democratic playbook elsewhere.

Incumbent Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill came out in opposition to confirming Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court 10 days ago. This move may have been ill advised as polls show she now trails her GOP opponent, Josh Hawley.

Previous polls in the last month have been tied. Hawley’s slight surge after the senator announced her opposition to Kavanaugh may be an omen of things to come.

A new poll released by The Missouri Scout on Saturday shows that Republican challenger Josh Hawley has taken a two point lead over Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) in the Missouri Senate race just days after she announced she will be voting against the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

Hawley leads McCaskill by a margin of 48 percent to 46 percent in the poll conducted by Missouri Scout over two days, from Wednesday, September 26 to Thursday, September 27.

McCaskill announced her opposition to Kavanaugh on September 19. The second day of the poll was conducted on the same day Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who has accused him of attempting to sexually assault her 36 years ago at a time and place she cannot recall and with no corroborating witnesses or evidence, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Significantly, the poll found that 49 percent of likely voters said the Supreme Court confirmation process for Brett Kavanaugh has made them less likely to vote for McCaskill, while only 42 percent said it made them more likely to vote for her.

The overall seven point deficit for McCaskill on this important question helps explain why Hawley has jumped into a two point lead. Even though the results are barely within the 2.5 percent margin of error, they are different than three national polls conducted earlier in September, all of which showed the race tied.

At least in Missouri, Democratic tactics against Kavanaugh may be backfiring:

Among female respondents, 47 percent said the confirmation process made them less likely to vote for McCaskill, while 42 percent said it made them more likely.

Among male respondents, 50 percent said the confirmation process made them less likely to vote for McCaskill, while 41 percent said it made them more likely.

Among Non-Partisan respondents, 46 percent said the confirmation process made them less likely to vote for McCaskill, while 39 percent said it made them more likely.

I think you’ll find this to be true in most Republican states. The process has been so tainted that voters could be in the mood to punish Democrats for their actions. How much of a difference it might make nationwide remains to be seen.

The bottom line is that McCaskill is going to need a significant number of GOP conservatives to get re-elected. Missouri has more Republicans in it than Democrats and McCaskill’s opposition only makes it that much harder for her to overcome the GOP advantage in the state.

The significance of this race cannot be overstated. If the Republicans can flip just one or two Democratic senate seats, the chances of the Democrats taking control of the upper body are reduced to close to zero. Hawley is very well funded and has run a decent campaign so far, making it difficult for McCaskill to attack him as an “extremist” which has been the Democratic playbook elsewhere.

Julie Swetnick, the third woman to accuse Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, was sued in 2000 for making false accusations of sexual misconduct against co-workers, and for sexual misconduct of her own, though the case was dismissed.

What are the numbers?

According to Variety, the Tim Allen-led sitcom averaged 8 million viewers in the key 18-49 age demographic, making it Fox’s most watched comedy in seven years.
Additionally, with premiers of "The Cool Kids" and "Hells Kitchen," the "Last Man Standing" revival led the charge for Fox’s "most watched Friday with entertainment in over nine and a half years and it’s highest-rated Friday during premiere week in seven years," Variety reported.
Compared to previous season debuts on ABC, for example, the show’s sixth season opened with 6 million viewers while averaging 6.4 million viewers throughout the season. And despite those very strong ratings, ABC canned the show last May.
Many at the time speculated ABC executives cancelled the show due to its conservative politics. Indeed, the show’s lead character played by Allen — Mike Baxter, a conservative father — often makes light of liberals and progressive politics.
Politics isn’t the goal of the show, though, Allen revealed to Fox News. The show is similar to his other television shows, such as "Home Improvement," for which Allen is most well known.
"When it comes down to it — we legitimately have more liberal writers than we have conservative writers,” he revealed. “They write funny stuff, and everybody has learned a little bit about how to tweak it and give people a little zest here and there — but it’s all about the theater," he told Fox News.
Fox executives officially resurrected "Last Man Standing" this summer following the highly successful reboot of "Roseanne" in the spring.

The woman who Christine Blasey Ford says attended the same party where Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh allegedly sexually assaulted her in the summer of 1982 spoke out Saturday morning.

What did she say?

Speaking through her attorney, Leland Keyser, who remains a close friend to Ford, said she is willing to "cooperate fully" with the FBI’s supplemental investigation into allegations against Kavanaugh.
But as Keyser revealed last weekend, she has no recollection of the events Ford alleges.
"As my client has already made clear, she does not know Judge Kavanaugh and has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford," Keyser’s attorney said.
"Notably, Ms. Keyser does not refute Dr. Ford’s account, and she has already told the press that she believes Dr. Ford’s account. However, the simple and unchangeable truth is that she is unable to corroborate it because she has no recollection of the incident in question," the lawyer explained.
The statement mirrored one her attorney, Howard Walsh, provided media last week. Walsh said: "Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford."
However, Keyser later told the Washington Post that, despite being unable to corroborate Ford’s allegations, she believes her friend.

Why is Keyser’s statement significant?

It shows that alleged witnesses remain unable to corroborate any of Ford’s accusations, despite the exhausting coverage of the accusations and this week’s hearing.
As the prosecutor who questioned Ford and Kavanaugh, Rachel Mitchell, admitted, the evidence against Kavanaugh, which is next to none, is not enough for prosecution, let alone an arrest or search warrant.

An anti-Trump Latino man who twice voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012 admits the spectacle involving Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford, who accuses Kavanaugh of sexual assault, has changed everything for him.
Writing under the pseudonym Tomas Mendoza, the man explains in a new essay for The Federalist that Kavanaugh’s tumultuous confirmation process — and the lack of due process — has earned Trump the vote of another Democrat.

What did Mendoza say?

He wrote:

I am a college-educated, suburban, first-generation Latino immigrant. I voted for President Obama in 2008 and 2012. I find President Trump to lack the basic moral character that we should expect in our political leaders and did not consider, even for a moment, voting for him in 2016. After watching how Senate Democrats and the media handled the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, however, I will be voting Republican in 2018 and for Trump in 2020.

Mendoza explained that his family escaped a country that had just fell victim to a military coup, experiencing first hand "the devastation that comes to a society when men of power believe their political objectives so justified that they are willing to pursue them by any means necessary."
During Thursday’s hearings, Mendoza saw "that same look in the eyes of Senate Democrats," he said.
"The hearings made clear that the Democrats on the committee were not interested in pursuing the truth or respecting Christine Blasey Ford’s desire for anonymity. Instead, they simply sought to delay the vote in the hopes of winning the next election," he wrote.
"If Kavanaugh’s reputation and Ford’s privacy had to be sacrificed on the altar of political expediency, the committee Democrats were not going to let basic decency prevent them from using the courts as an alternative path to the political ends they cannot reach through legislation," Mendoza explained.
The writer went on to say he believes both Ford and Kavanaugh, but stressed that what happened this week will have implications extending beyond the fight for Anthony Kennedy’s Supreme Court seat.
"That question is whether the politics of power, the politics by any means demonstrated by Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats, will be rewarded," Mendoza wrote.
"If Democrats are allowed to delay this nomination and the elections in 2018 and 2020 benefit them, both Republicans and Democrats for a generation will have learned that the American people prefer to be ruled by tyrants that punish their enemies instead of representatives in a republic who adhere to the rule of law," he said.

A Make America Great Again hat-wearing Kanye West ended the 44th season premiere of Saturday Night Live with an impassioned political speech that saw the Grammy-winning fashion icon defend President Donald Trump.

A U.S. District Court Judge has ruled that Oregon senator Jeff Merkley can proceed with his grandstanding lawsuit against the Trump Administration and Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Judge Amy Berman Jackson was appointed by Obama in early 2011, and took the bench in March after a 97-0 confirmation vote.

A lawsuit filed by a Democratic senator from Oregon aiming to compel the Trump administration to release 100,000 pages of documents on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is inching forward in federal court, with an Obama nominee assigned to hear it.

Sen. Jeff Merkley’s lawsuit, filed Wednesday in federal court in the nation’s capital, has been overshadowed by sexual harassment accusations against the nominee, but the case remains alive, with summonses prepared for U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions and others, court documents show.

Now Merkley is asking the federal court to order the Trump administration, which has claimed executive privilege in withholding the 100,000 documents on Kavanaugh, to delay hearings until they’re produced and senators can digest them.

Merkley told reporters in a conference call Wednesday that “we’re seeking the court to intervene and give senators access to the nominee’s record.”

The judge assigned to the case, Amy Berman Jackson, was nominated to the federal court by then-President Barack Obama in 2011. She has handled some high-profile cases.

Jackson was to have presided over the trial of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort until he pleaded guilty in a plea bargain earlier this month. Jackson said Manafort’s plea deal requires him to cooperate “fully and truthfully” with the special counsel’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Jackson said Manafort must participate in interviews and debriefings, provide documents and testify in future cases.

At the center of Merkley’s lawsuit are records from when Kavanaugh worked in the George W. Bush White House as legal counsel and then as staff secretary. The Trump administration says disclosing records from his tenure as legal counsel would disrupt the functions or decision-making processes of the executive branch.

But that’s not all. Amy Berman Jackson was also the judge who tossed out a lawsuit against Hillary filed by the families of Benghazi victims Tyrone Woods and Sean Smith.

Judge Jackson dismissed a lawsuit in May of 2017 brought by the parents of Tyrone Woods and Sean Smith, two soldiers killed in the 2012 Benghazi attack. The lawsuit alleged that Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server caused the death of their sons, and that Clinton defamed them after disputing their account of a meeting with her. In her decision, Jackson calls the deaths of the plaintiffs’ sons “tragic” and an “unspeakable loss,” but said they did not prove their argument.

In fairness, though, Berman Jackson was also the judge who ruled that the IRS was unfairly targeting conservative groups, and presided over the Jesse Jackson Jr. trial, where he was convicted on his campaign financing covfefe.

Meanwhile, senator Jeff Merkley is rumored to be running for President in 2020, so he needs to manufacture as many scandals against Trump as he can, so he can grandstand and gain name recognition.

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning. Guest posting is disabled for security reasons.

Announcement: We have disabled the ability to post graphics after experiencing an attack of inappropriate image spam over the last several days. Thanks for your understanding.

But that was just the beginning of Trump rejoicing in good news for the American economy. His next related post was based on the Final Results for September 2018 from the University of Michigan’s Surveys of Consumers.

Consumer confidence hits an 18 year high, close to breaking the all-time record. A big jump from last 8 years. People are excited about the USA again! We are getting Bigger and Richer and Stronger. WAY MORE TO GO!

Based on the findings, Breitbart reported that, “American consumer sentiment improved again in September, propelled higher as households in the bottom third of incomes hit the highest level since November 2000.” And there was more good news.

“Consumer confidence rose in September, notching its highest level in about 18 years. The Consumer Board’s index rose to 138.4 this month from 134.7 in August…” https://t.co/ZbxjnrRvAX

Breitbart wrote that some other positives also hadn’t been seen since before Obama took office. “Consumers at every level of income held very optimistic expectations for improved personal finances in the year ahead, the best survey result since 2004.”

In the University of Michigan report, Richard Curtin, their Surveys of Consumers chief economist, wrote that, “Despite a lessening in September of the expected size of gains in nominal incomes, inflation expectations also declined, acting to offset concerns about declining living standards. Consumers anticipated continued growth in the economy and expected the unemployment rate to continue to slowly decline during the year ahead.”

However, the survey also noted something that has been making a lot of headlines as of late: concern about tariffs.

Has the “Trump Economy” helped you?

Curtain noted that tariffs were “the single issue that was cited as having a potential negative impact on the economy.” Interestingly, in the results he found that, “Those that voiced negative views of tariffs also held much less favorable prospects for the economy and held inflation expectations that were 0.6 of a percentage point higher than those who didn’t mention tariffs.”

On social media, some members of the public also celebrated the great economic news. Many were quick to give credit for it to Trump and his policies.

Of course, some were quick to point out the error, again, of Nancy Pelosi’s infamous “crumbs” statement. That is just one of many things she’s said that may continue to come back to haunt her throughout Trump’s presidency.

America’s low-income earners boosted consumer sentiment this month, evidence that an economic expansion is benefiting a larger swath of workers.#MAGAHey ⁦@NancyPelosi⁩ guess those “crumbs” are really beneficial to Americans at all income levels. https://t.co/wc1p9UKDkn

With such ongoing good economic news, including for poorer household in America, November’s midterms are looking better and better for Republicans. The Democrats tend to focus on class warfare, something that doesn’t play well when the lower and middle classes are seeing boons with jobs and income.

Something is happening in America. And I don’t know if it’s an equal and opposite reaction to so many leftist factions protesting the flag or if it’s just a resurgence of respect. But it seems to be growing and it’s very prevalent in our youth.

American kids are honoring symbols of our country, and they are doing it on their own, without being coached, prodded or pushed.

This latest display was stumbled upon by an unsuspecting bystander on his way to a football game at Bullock Creek high school in Midland, Michigan.

On September 21, Mike Ullery Jr. was on his way to the high school football game when he saw an amazing sight.

As the national anthem blared over the loud speakers, four teenage boys stopped and placed their right hands over their hearts to honor the national anthem — right there in the middle of the high school parking lot.

CBS News reported Ullery’s amazement at the event: “As the anthem began to blare, the teens showed their respect for the song and took their hats off to salute the flag. Ullery was surprised by their patriotism and decided to take a photo of the young men.”

He shared the photo with this caption on his Facebook page, where it proceeded to go viral.

“I was impressed by these Bullock Creek boys. Running late to the game they heard the national anthem and stopped, took off their hats and placed hands over heart. Respect.”

I was impressed by these Bullock Creek boys. Running late to the game they heard the national anthem and stopped, took off their hats and placed hands over heart! ❤ Respect🇺🇸

Are these the kinds of values you want to see in American kids?

At the time of this article’s publication, the photo had received 2000 likes and 3000 shares.

While Ullery didn’t speak to the boys at the event, they were later identified as Dakota Lehner, Mikiah Lehner, Taylor Cox and Collin Hitchingham. Several Bullock Creek parents helped identify the patriot teens from the social media post.

“I was just proud of them, so I just snapped a picture and hoped it would get back to them when I posted it on Facebook,” Ullery said to CBS News.

Commenters on his post also agreed with Ullery and thought the boys were fine young patriots with wonderful parents, “impressive” and “great kids.”

Well, I would have to agree. Former NCAA basketball champ and former head basketball coach at UCLA and Indiana University John Wooden said, “The true test of a man’s character is what he does when no one is watching.” And these boys didn’t know anyone was watching.

We’ve published other such accounts of respect and patriotism in the recent past. I’m hoping it is more than a trend and instead is becoming a standard in the culture from our youth.

Earlier in September, three elementary school boys in Hayden, Idaho, showed all of their classmates — and maybe even some of the grown ups — just how to respect the flag when retiring her for the night. Everyday after school these boys retire the colors, making certain they never touch the ground. They are an inspiring bunch.

And in August, when a 10 year old boy got out of a wheel chair to stand during the national anthem, it was worthy of a news report.

I like what I’m seeing here. There is so much disrespect toward our nation, our flag, and our laws — most of it by adults. When the youth of our country remind us what priorities are important, it gives me hope.

I’ll bet these high school boys never thought they would be the subjects of national news when they made the split-second decision to stand for the anthem that day.

But Archila is an experienced activist with ties to George Soros. She is co-executive director of the left-wing Center for Popular Democracy, a New York-based organizing group that gets much of its money from the liberal billionaire.

“George Soros is one of the largest funders to the CPD,” The Washington Free Beacon reported in 2017. “Soros provided the CPD with $130,000 from the Foundation to Promote Open Society in 2014 and $1,164,500 in 2015. Soros provided an additional $705,000 from the Open Society Policy Center in 2016.”

On Friday morning, Flake made his way to the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing after announcing that he intended to vote to confirm Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Archila and Gallagher were among the women who confronted him while blocking the door to the elevator he was on.

“This is not tolerable!” they screamed at him.

“You have children in your family. Think about them! I have two children. I cannot imagine that for the next 50 years they will have to have someone in the Supreme Court who has been accused of violating a young girl. What are you doing, sir?!” Archila shouted at Flake.

Do you think the protesters had political motives?

An aide asked her if she would talk to a staffer outside, to which Archila snapped, “No. I want to talk to him. Don’t talk to me.”

Gallagher said Flake’s decision had personal significance for her, telling Flake that she was sexually assaulted and nobody believed her.

“I didn’t tell anyone, and you’re telling all women that they don’t matter, that they should just stay quiet because if they tell you what happened to them you are going to ignore them. That’s what happened to me, and that’s what you are telling all women in America, that they don’t matter,” Gallagher said in the emotional confrontation.

“Look at me when I’m talking to you,” she demanded. “You are telling me that my assault doesn’t matter, that what happened to me doesn’t, and that you’re going to let people who do these things into power. That’s what you’re telling me when you vote for him. Don’t look away from me.”

Flake listened to their shouting silently, occasionally nodding in response. When the women finished and allowed him to pass, he continued to the committee hearing.

“I wanted him to feel my rage,” Archila said in an interview Friday with The New York Times. Her opportunity to express it to him came after she had spent all week in Washington protesting Kavanaugh’s nomination.

After private meetings with Senate Democrats, Flake told the panel that he would only vote for Kavanaugh on the condition that the Senate vote be delayed and another FBI investigation be conducted.

Archila claimed responsibility for Flake’s request to delay the vote. “His reaction shows the power that we have, together, when we chose to tell our stories and stand up for our vision of an inclusive society,” she wrote in an Op-Ed for USA Today on Saturday. “When we take action, we breathe new life and possibility into our democracy.”

It seems that there was more at play for the protesters than just rallying around in support of sexual assault survivors. Archila may have been as much against Kavanaugh for his politics as for the allegations. In her USA Today commentary, she revealed her political views, writing, “Brett Kavanaugh is not fit to serve.”

“Much of his record on civil rights, worker protections, health care and reproductive justice is an abomination. So, too, is his personal history of treating women as less deserving of respect and control over our lives, as these accusations against him have shown,” Archila wrote.

It doesn’t come as much of a surprise that the activist had political motives for the confrontation, but the revelation of her ties to Soros falls in line with concerns that many Kavanaugh protesters are paid players in the political arena.